Evidence for the Use of Hearing Assistive Technology by Adults: The Role of the FM System

Trends in Amplification

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 73-89

  Chisolm, Theresa Hnath ^a   Noe, Colleen M ^a   McArdle, Rachel ^a   Abrams, Harvey ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

adults; FM; hearing assistive technology; hearing loss

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AUDIOGRAPHY; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONFERENCE PAPER; COUNSELING; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FOLLOW UP; FREQUENCY MODULATION; HEARING AID; HEARING LOSS; HUMAN; MALE; NOISE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY OF LIFE; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SOUND PRESSURE; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; VETERAN;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COUNSELING; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF-HELP DEVICES; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; VETERANS;

EID: 34347397015     PISSN: 10847138     EISSN: 19405588     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1084713807300879     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Valente M. Summary guidelines: audiological management of adult hearing impairment. Audio Today. 2006;18(5): 32–37.
2. Hawkins D. Comparisons of speech recognition in noise by mildly-to-profound hearing-impaired children using hearing aids and FM systems. JSHD. 1984;49: 409–418.
3. Crandell C Smaldino J. Room acoustics and amplification. In: Valente M Roeser R Hosford-Dunn H eds. Audiology: Treatment Strategies. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers; 2000: 601–637.
4. Jerger J Chmiel R Florin E Pirozzolo F Wilson N. Comparison of conventional amplification and an assistive listening device in elderly persons. Ear Hear. 1996;17: 490–504.
5. Kalikow D Stevens K Elliott L. Development of a speech intelligibility test in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. J Acoust Soc Am. 1977;61: 1337–1351.
6. Ventry I Weinstein B. The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: a new tool. Ear Hear. 1982;3: 128–134.
7. Lewis MS Crandell CC Valente M Enrietto JE. Speech perception in noise: directional microphones versus frequency modulation (FM) systems. J Am Acad Audiol. 2004;15: 426–439.
8. Nilsson M Soli S Sullivan J. Development of the hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception in quiet and noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994;95: 1085–1099.
9. Lewis MS Valente M Horn JE Crandall C. The effect of hearing aids and frequency modulation technology on results from the Communication Profile for the Hearing Impaired. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16: 250–261.
10. Demorest ME Erdman SA. Development of the Communication Profile for the Hearing Impaired. J Speech Hear Dis. 1987;52: 129–143.
11. Boothroyd A. Hearing aid accessories for adults: the remote FM microphone. Ear Hear. 2004;25: 22–33.
12. Pichora-Fuller MK Robertson L. Planning and evaluation of a hearing rehabilitation program in a home-for-the-aged: use of hearing aids and assistive listening devices. J Speech Lang Path Audiol. 1997;21: 174–186.
13. Cashman M Lewsen BJ. Hearing aids and assistive listening devices in long-term care. J Speech Lang Path Audiol. 1997;21: 149–152.
14. Byrne D Cotton S. Evaluation of the National Acoustic Laboratories’ new hearing aid selection procedure. J Speech Hear Res. 1998;31: 178–186.
15. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA). Guidelines for Fitting and Monitoring FM Systems. ASHA Desk Reference. Rockville, Md: ASHA; 2002.
16. Kochkin S. Introducing MarkeTrak: a consumer tracking survey of the hearing instrument market. Hear J. 1990;43: 17–27.
17. Dillon H James A Ginis J. Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) and its relationship to several others measures of benefit and satisfaction provided by hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol. 1997;8: 27–43.
18. Cox RM. Evidence-based practice in the provision of amplification. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;16: 419–438.
19. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
20. Kirk RE. Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences. Belmont, Calif: Brooks/Cole; 1982.
21. Kochkin S. MarkeTrak VI: 10-year customer satisfaction trends in the US hearing instrument market. Hear Rev. 2002;9: 14–25,46.
22. Wong LL Hickson L McPherson B. Hearing aid satisfaction: what does research from the past 20 years say? Trends Amp. 2003;7: 117–161.
23. McLeod B Upfold L Broadbent C. An investigation of the applicability of the Inventory, Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life, at 2 weeks post hearing aid fitting. Ear Hear. 2001;22: 342–347.
24. Dillon H. Hearing Aids. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers; 2001.
25. Abrams H Hnath Chisolm T. Outcome measures in audiology: report of VA Task Force on outcome measures. In: Valente M Roeser R Hosford-Dunn H eds. Audiology: Practice Management. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers; 2000: 69–95.